IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT AMARAVATF-^ y Or “O' 7Q o '.Ik o ?>// THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO/*^ THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 400 OF 2025 ^ Writ Appeal under clause 1 S'^f the Letters Patent preferred aaainst the order dt.01.04.2025 in W.P.No.8411 of 2025, on the file oUhe ^gh CoTrt i Between: Sn Vidyaranya Gurukula Vaidika Patasala Sangam, Rep. by its President veire"'Rto''4 25q Chandramouieswara Rao, Aged about 52 Andhra Pradifstatr''^'^"''" Anantapuram District, ...APPELLANT/WRIT PETITIONER AND 1. TheStateofAndhraPradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary T Department, A.P. Secretary Velagapudi, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh. 2. The District Collector, Anantapuram, Anantapuram District Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapuram District. 4. The Tahsildar, Anantapuram Anantapuram District. 5. The Superintendent of Police, Anantapuram District Anantapuram. 6. The Station House Officer, Anantapuram Rural Police Station Anantapuram, Anantapuram District. 7. G.L.N.Srav^ Kumar, S/o Late G.Chandra Sekhar Aged about 33 D?strL^^° D.No.3/113, 3' Road Anantapuram Town, Anantapuram Revenue 8. G.Hari Prasad, S/o. Late G.Subramanyam, R/o. D.No.6-1-126-13, Lakshmi Nagar Anantapuram Town, Anantapuram District. 9. G.Narendra Babu, S/o. Late G.V.Sastry Aged about 44 years, R/o. D.No.6-1-126-14 Lakshmi Nagar Anantapuram Town, Anantapuram District. lO.G.Rama Sankar, S/o. Late G.L.Kantha Rao, R/o. D.No.4/142, III Road Anantapuram Town, Anantapuram District. ...RESPONDENTS-^ lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere highhandedly into the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners pertaining to the schedule property viz., described under R.C.No.315/2021 Dt. 07.03.2025 issued by Respondent No.4 / Tahsildar, Ananthapuram Rural Mandal, Ananthapuram District under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 viz., there upon not to interfere the schedule property of the petitioner situated in “Ananthapuramu District - Ananthapuramu sub District - Ananthapuramu Taluka / Rural Mandal - A.Narayanapuram Panchayath - situated in Sy.Nos.106- 1, 106-2, 119-1 and 119-2 in an extent of Ac. 10.00 Cents full bounded within the specific meats and bound - paiki - the petitioners house bearing D.No.4/81 with the land of an extent of Ac.4.86 cents full. Counsel for the Appellant: SRI JITENDRA KANYALUR- Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : GP FOR REVENUE^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6 : GP FOR HOME ^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos.7 to 10 : SRI PANGA SIVANARAYi^A The Court made the following: JUDGMENT APHCO'10175912025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3525] WEDNEESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 400/2025 Between: Sri VidyaranyaGurukulaVaidikaPatasalaSangam ...APPELLANT AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant: 1.JITENDRA. KANYALUR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME 2.GP FOR REVENUE 3. PANGA SIVANARAYANA The Court made the following Judgment: (perHon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) A dispute arose as to ownership and possession of land and buildings situated in land in Sy. Nos. 106-1 & 106-2 of Papampeta Village A. Narayanapuram Gram Panchayat, Anantapur District. This dispute resulted in the filing of L.G.O.P. No.120 of 1983 before the Tribunal under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Anantapur. This L.G.O.P., was RRR,J & Dr.KMRJ W.A.No.400 of2025 disposed of, by an order, dated 16.04.1990, wherein the petition was allowed and the respondents 1 to 7, in the said L.G.O.P., were directed to vacate the properties described in the schedule, in the L.G.O.P. and hand over the vacant possession of the land to the petitioners in the L.G.O.P. This Order came to be challenged, by way of L.G.A. No.5 of 1990 before the Special Court under Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) came to be dismissed, by a judgment, dated 30.11.1992. Thereafter. Order became final as the said Order Act. This Appeal the was not challenged any further. 2. Thereafter, the petitioners in L.G.O.P. No.120 of 1983 Court, by way of W.P.No.7247 of 2019, for the Tribunal, in O.P.No.120 of 1983, to the Revenue Authorities the Writ Petition, the matter 08.02.2020. In this Lok Adalat approached this implementation of the directions of on the ground that, their representations were not being considered. During the pendency of was referred to the Lok Adalat, held I the petitioners in W.P.No.7247 of 2019, seeking implementation of the Order in O.P.No.120 of 1983, and the Official Respondents arrived at on a compromise and an award Adalat, on 08.02.2020, for implementation of the was passed by the Lok directions of the Tribunal, in O.P.No.120 of 1983. 3. The Revenue Authorities issued notices to be in occupation of the land, which of 1983. These persons approached this Court, 12.05.2021, issued under the to the persons, who were said were the subject matter of O.P.No.120 challenging the notice, dated provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land 3 RRR,J & Dr.KMRJ W.A.No.400 of 2025 Grabbing Act, 1982, by way of W.P.No. 10451 of 2021 & batch. It appears that the appellant herein, had also moved Writ Petition bearing No.10200 of 2021, which was subsequently withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh Writ Petition. Thereafter, the appellant herein, filed W.P.No.8411 of 2025. 4. It may also be recorded that the persons seeking implementation of the Orders, in O.P.No.120 of 1983, moved this Court, by way of W.P.No.7840 of 2021, for implementation of the directions, in O.P.No.120 of 1983. A learned Single Judge of this Court considered all these Writ Petitions and disposed of these Writ Petitions, by way of a common order, dated 5. 05.12.2024. 6. The primary issue that was raised before the learned Single Judge, in these cases, was on the question of whether the boundaries or property. mentioned in the Original Petition issued same and the boundaries of the properties which are sought to be taken over from the petitioners in the above Writ Petitions. 7. The learned Single Judge, after considering this issue, disposed of the Writ Petitions with the following directions: “The respondent authority concerned shall implement the order dated 16.04.1990 passed in L.G.O.P.No.1.20 of 1983, strictly as per the schedule of the boundaries mentioned therein in accordance with law within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the authority concerned has to confine to the schedule mentioned in the L.G.O.P.No. 120 of 1983 before taking any steps to evict the parties. However, this order should not come in the way of the suits pending before the competent Civil Courts. ” 4 RRR,J & Dr.KMR,J W.A.No.400 of 2025 Writ Appeal Nos.299 & 300 of 2025, filed against this judgment disposed of, on 24.03.2025 with certain directions. were 8. Thereafter, the appellant herein, moved V\/.P.No.8411 of 2025 contending that the property in the possession of the appellant does not fall within the schedule set out in the O.P.. Apart from this, the appellant also contended that the land in question falls outside the boundaries of the Anantapur Municipal Corporation and the same would not be amenable to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Anantapur, in as much as the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing Act, does not extend to lands, which fall outside the boundaries of Municipalities or Municipal Corporations. 9. On this basis, the appellant had also sought an interim injunction, restraining the respondents herein from dispossessing the appellant from the land that is said to be in his possession. 10. The appellant also sought to place reliance on the Order of a Division Bench of this Court, dated 24.03.2025, in W.A.Nos.299 & 300 of 2025, to contend that, he would be entitled to the protection of this Court. 11. In W.A.Nos.299 & 300 of 2025, this Court, while dealing with the issues raised by some other affected parties, in relation to implementation of the Order, in O.P.No.120 of 1983, had directed that, maintenance of Status quo, pending further orders, by the learned Single Judge, in W.P.No.7840 of 2021. 5 RRR,J & Dr.KMRJ W.A.NoAOO of 2025 The learned Single Judge, after considering the Order of the Division Bench, in W.A.Nos.299 & 300 of 2025, had held that the claim of the appellant was not similar to the claim of the appellants in W.A.Nos.299 & 300 of 2025 and declined to grant any relief, by way of an Order, dated 01.04.2025. 12. 13. Aggrieved by this Order, the appellant has approached this Court. 14. It is the contention of the appellant that the Order, in O.P.No.120 of 1983, cannot be iitiplemented, until the boundaries of the schedule mentioned property is ascertained and it is verified whether the land in the possession of the appellant falls within the schedule of L.G.O.P. No.120 of 1983. It is further contended that, the appellant could not be subjected to dispossession until notice had been issued for conduct of Survey and further action is taken on the basis of such Survey. In view of the fact that, the learned Single Judge, was only considering the question of whether the appellant is similarly situated to the appellant in W.A.Nos.299 & 300 of 2025 and since the issues of identity of the property and the question of property falls within the boundaries given in the schedule of O.P.No.120 of 1983 had not been considered, it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Appeal with a liberty to the appellant to approach the learned Single Judge on these issues and such other issues that may be raised before the learned Single Judge. 15. There shall be no order as to costs. 6 RRR,J & Dr.KMR,J W.A.No.400 of2025 pending, if any shall stand As a sequel, interlocutory applications closed. Sd/- M.PvAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// f? % SECTION OFFICER To, ^ Secretary, Revenue Department radesh, A.P. Secretary Velagapudi, Guntur r’ Anantapuram. Anantapuram State of Andhra District Andhra Pradesh. District Andhra 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapuram District. 4. The Tahsildar, Anantapuram Anantapuram District. 5. The Superintendent of Police, Anantapuram r Anantapuram Rural Anantapuram, Anantapuram District. District Anantapi^. Police Station 7. One CC to Sri Jitendra Kanyalur, Advocate 8. Two CCs to GP for Revenue 9. Two CCs to GP for Home [OPUC] ^ High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]^ lO.One CC to Sri Panga Sivanarayana, Advocate (OPUC) 11.Three C.D. Copies. Cnr 9 HIGH COURT DATED:07/05/2025 JUDGMENT WA.No.400 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS